RESIDENTS against a four-storey development in Applecross have lost their bid to stop it from progressing after the Metro Central Joint Development Assessment Panel (JDAP) voted unanimously to support it.
Tuscom Subdivision Consultants wants to build a multi-level development comprising 10 dwellings, undercroft parking and a roof terrace on the corner of Tweeddale and Carron roads.
Amir Meshkin, a spokesman for unsettled residents, used Thursday’s meeting to argue the size and scale of the development would impact amenity by blocking views and creating privacy issues for neighbours adjacent to the build.
Residents against the proposal previously queried the validity of the process that led the site, which used to slope, to be levelled.
On Thursday Mr Meshkin again argued the $7 million development was higher than the allowed 16m limit.
“We believe that if we were to revert to the original natural ground level prior to the (City of Melville) approving three metres of fill across the site in 2008, the current development proposal would be non-compliant,” he said.
A review of the ground level prior to 2008 was presented to the JDAP in an updated Responsible Authority Report, finding: “the proposed building fits comfortably within the maximum building height tolerance of 16m above natural ground level”.
It said the proposed development would be height compliant, irrespective of which natural ground level was relied upon.
“The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the provisions of the Canning Bridge Activity Centre Plan, and is recommended for approval on that basis,” it read.
Nearby residents also argued the finished floor level, in relation to adjoining footpaths and verge levels, was technically too high.
But City of Melville statutory planning manager Peter Prendergast said the intention of this clause referred “to the relationship between the commercial activity on the street as opposed to a residential activity on the street”.
Presiding member Charles Johnson closed by backing the proposal.
“Having looked closely at this issue and considered the range of advice we’ve received and looked at the submissions that have been made, I have come to the conclusion it is appropriate for the JDAP to approve this development with the conditions that have been provided (in the RAR),” he said.
“I understand the impact of this form of change in the area but it has been something that has been generally contemplated in the activity structure plan and there is, in my view, support for this form of development.”
The RAR was backed 5 – 0.Mr Meshkin said affected neighbours felt extremely disappointed “that our concerns regarding the development proposal have been dismissed”.